| Literature DB >> 22235380 |
Hany Elfayoumy1, Ashraf Abou-Elela, Tamer Orban, Ashraf Emran, Mohamed Elghoneimy, Ahmed Morsy.
Abstract
Objective. Although a large debate exists regarding the need for reflux prevention in ileal orthotopic neobladders, it is our policy to continue performing nonrefluxing ureteroileal anastomoses for our patients. An ideal uretero-ileal anastomosis must be simple, nonrefluxing, as well as non-obstructive. Here, we present a new antireflux mechanism for orthotopic ileal neobladders. Methods. 12 radical cystectomy patients for muscle invasive bladder cancer were candidates for orthotopic urinary diversion and underwent a non-refluxing uretero-ileal anastomosis using the flat-segment technique with a follow up of 6 to 18 months. Results. Preliminary results after the short-term followup showed that the success rate in reflux prevention was 92% and no cases of obstruction. The upper tracts were preserved or improved in all 12 patients. Operative time for neobladder creation ranged between 120-240 minutes, with a mean of 165 minutes (±36 minutes). No diversion-related complications. Conclusions. Based on our early data, we believe that the flat-segment uretero-ileal anastomosis technique for reflux prevention in orthotopic ileal bladder substitutes is simple, easy to learn and carries no additional morbidity to a standard refluxing uretero-ileal anastomosis, but has the advantage of effective reflux prevention. A longer follow-up period study with more patient numbers is ongoing.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22235380 PMCID: PMC3197076 DOI: 10.5402/2011/431951
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Urol ISSN: 2090-5807
Figure 1Steps for creation of the bladder substitute with the flat-segment valve technique.
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5| Procedure | Renal units | Stenosis | Reflux |
|---|---|---|---|
| Le-Duc: | |||
| Le-Duc et al. [ | 260 | 2% | 15% |
| Shaaban et al. [ | 38 | 29% | 2.6% |
|
| |||
| Serous lined extramural tunnel: | |||
| Abol-Enein and Ghoneim [ | 102 | 3% | 0% |
| Papadopoulos and Jacobsen [ | 50 | 4% | 2% |
| Osman et al. [ | 39 | 5.1% | 7.7% |
|
| |||
| Split cuff technique (nipple): | |||
| Stone and MacDermott [ | 36 | 0% | 3% |
| Sagalowsky [ | 98 | 3.1% | 4.2% |
|
| |||
| Subserosal tunneling: | |||
| Starr et al. [ | 20 | 10% | 0% |
|
| |||
| Serosal fixation an astomosis: | |||
| Itatani and Sonoda [ | 20 | 0% | 15% |
|
| |||
| Hammock anastomosis: | |||
| Hirdes et al. [ | 57 | 6% | 20% |
|
| |||
| Intussuscepted valve (Kock): | |||
| Elmajian et al. [ | 295 | 1.4% | 2% |
| Osman et al. [ | 38 | 5.25% | 5.25% |
|
| |||
| Antireflux hydraulic valve: | |||
| Benchekroun [ | 210 | 20% | 0% |
|
| |||
| Afferent isoperistaltic ileal segment: | |||
| Studer et al. [ | 40 | 4% | 0% |
| Studer et al. [ | 70 | 35% | 0% |
| Courteny et al. [ | 100 | 6% | 0% |
|
| |||
| Wall-incorporated anti-reflux valve: | |||
| El-Bakry [ | 34 | 0.03% | 0% |
|
| |||
| T-pouch: | |||
| Stein et al. [ | 209 | 7.2% | 10% |